Effects of Content-Based Instruction to Non-English-Major Undergraduates English Teaching with Internet-Based Language Laboratory Support
- 1 School of Foreign Studies, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China
- 2 Paotong Elementary School, Wuhan, China
Abstract
With development of technology of computer and internet, it is a beneficial attempt to the reform of College English Teaching based on the subject content with Internet-Based Language Laboratory support for non-English-majored undergraduate students. Content-Based Instruction (CBI) has been defined as “the teaching of content information in the language being learned with little or no direct or explicit effort to teach the language itself separately from the content being taught”, which can make non-English-majored undergraduate students not only learn subject knowledge but also improve their foreign language (English) ability in learning content in Internet-Based Language Laboratory (IBLL). 90 non-English-majored undergraduate students in Yangtze University participated in this study for one-year experiment to investigate effects of CBI English teaching with IBLL support. Results in this study showed that: 1) Compared with the control group (CG), both CBI English teaching and CBI English teaching with IBLL support could improve the level of English learning motivation of non-English-majored undergraduate students in their English learning, and CBI English teaching with IBLL support is better in enhancing the level of English learning motivation; 2) compared with the control group (CG), both CBI English teaching and CBI English teaching with IBLL support could improve the level of English language applied ability of non-English-majored undergraduate students in their English learning, and CBI English teaching with IBLL support is better in enhancing the level of English language applied ability; 3) both CBI English teaching and CBI English teaching with IBLL support are limited for some non-English- majored undergraduate students with poor foreign language (English) basis.
- Benesch, S. (1988). Linking Content and Language Teachers: Collaboration across the Curriculum. In S. Benesch (Ed.), Ending Remediation: Linking ESL and Content in Higher Education. Washington DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.
- Brinton, D. M., Snow, M. A., & Wesche, M. B. (1989). Content-Based Second Language Instruction. New York: Harper & Row.
- Chumpavan, S. A (2001). Comparative Study of Two English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Programs: Non-Content-Based and Content-Based at the University Level in Thailand. Ph.D. Dissertation, Normal: Illinois State University.
- Crandall, J. (1999). Content-Based Instruction (CBI). Concise Encyclopedia of Educational Linguistics (pp. 208-604). Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Kasper, L. F. (1994). Improved Reading Performance for ESL Students through Academic Course Pairing. Journal of Reading, 5, 376-384.
- Kasper, L. F. (1997). The Impact of Content-Based Instructional Programs on the Academic Progress of ESL Students. English f or Specific Purposes, 4, 309-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00035-5
- Li, L. S. (2002). Sustained-Content Language Teaching Mode and Its Enlightenment to College English Teaching Reform in China. Foreign Language World, 4, 36-40.
- Lv, L. H. (2001). The Integration of Language and Content—Trend of Foreign Language Teaching Reform. Global Education, 8, 52-56.
- Mohan, B. A. (1986). Language and Content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
- Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (p. 204). New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667305
- Valeo, A. (2013). The Integration of Language and Content: Form-Focused Instruction in a Content-Based Language Program. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16, 25-50.
- Yu, L. M., & Han, J. X. (2003). Based on Course Teaching in Ottawa and Its Enlightenment. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 3, 465-468.